Jaffe v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association
- Gregory Woods
- 1:21-cv-00539
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
Jaffe v. JPMorgan Chase, Judge Woods ordered the parties to follow a protective order governing confidential discovery information.
The parties—David Jaffe, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, and Equifax Information Services, LLC—and their counsel, representatives, employees, designated experts, witnesses, vendors, mediators, arbitrators, and other people covered by or notified of the protective order.
What happened
In Jaffe v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, the parties asked the court to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information they might exchange during discovery. The opinion does not address the underlying claims.
The order allows parties to mark certain financial, proprietary, personal, and other court-approved information as confidential. It limits disclosure, requires certain recipients to sign nondisclosure agreements, and restricts use of confidential information to this case and related appeals.
Judge Gregory H. Woods approved the parties’ stipulated protective order on February 5, 2021. The order also sets procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, filing confidential material with the court, returning or destroying the material, and enforcing the order.
The detailed version
- Jaffe v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association · No. 1:21-cv-00539
- Gregory Woods
- Feb. 5, 2021
Background
The parties jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They sought protection for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately limited confidentiality order governing the pretrial phase of the case.
What the Order Covers
The order applies to the parties, their officers, agents, employees, attorneys, people acting with them, and others who have actual notice of the order. It covers discovery material designated as “Confidential.” A producing party may designate only material that it reasonably and in good faith believes contains previously undisclosed financial information; trade secrets or other proprietary information; personal or intimate information, including personal income or credit history; or another category the court later gives confidential status.
The producing party generally must clearly mark confidential portions and provide a redacted copy for public use. Deposition testimony and exhibits may be designated during the deposition or within 30 days afterward. During that 30-day period, the entire deposition transcript is treated as confidential. A producing party may also correct an earlier failure to designate material by giving written notice and providing replacement versions within two business days.
Disclosure and Use Restrictions
Confidential material may be disclosed only to specified recipients, including the parties and their insurers; counsel and their support staff; litigation vendors; mediators or arbitrators; certain people identified on a document; potential witnesses; experts and other specialized advisers; deposition stenographers; and the court. Mediators, arbitrators, witnesses, experts, and specialized advisers must first sign the required nondisclosure agreement after receiving the order.
Recipients may use confidential material only to prosecute or defend this case and related appeals. The order does not waive objections to discovery, privilege, or arguments about whether evidence may be admitted at trial. It also does not make a final finding that designated material is actually confidential. The court retained discretion over whether to give material confidential treatment and warned that it was unlikely to seal material introduced into evidence at trial.
Court Filings and Challenges
A party filing confidential material must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal in accordance with the court’s rules. A party seeking sealing must submit an application and supporting declaration with a particularized justification. Parties may object to confidentiality designations or request additional disclosure limits, such as attorneys’-eyes-only treatment, and must bring unresolved disputes to the court under its individual practices.
The order permits disclosure in response to a lawful subpoena or other compulsory process, subject to notice to the producing party when reasonably possible and, if the timing permits, at least 10 days before disclosure. The producing party bears the burden of opposing the compulsory process if it chooses to do so.
Duration and Disposition
People with access to confidential material must take reasonable precautions against unauthorized or accidental disclosure. Within 60 days after final disposition of the case, including appeals, recipients must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy the confidential material and certify that they retained no copies or other reproductions. Counsel specifically retained for the case may keep archival copies of specified litigation materials, which remain subject to the order.
The order continues after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction as needed to enforce it or impose contempt sanctions. Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered the parties and other covered persons to comply with the stipulated protective order. The opinion is a discovery-related order and does not decide the merits of the underlying dispute.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.